On the subject of contrails and stealthy aircraft, I found this link saying the B-2 carries a device called the Pilot Alerting System to warn if contrails are being generated. Supposedly, the plane also has been modified to reduce the production of contrails but the information is sketchy at best and may be completely wrong. Some websites claim they add chloro-fluorosulphonic acid to reduce contrails but I've seen another that claims that stuff is too corrosive for operational use.

In the UK it would be a mirror

if anyone is interested here is an interesting MS thesis on the STUDY OF CONTRAILS MITIGATION by C ZINTHALER from CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING


https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/b...r%20thesis.pdf

__________________
Disclaimer: I have no theories, I am not smart enough to come up with theories. I only have a hypothesis. So anything I may write, statement or otherwise is just a hypothesis based on what I observe...

The difference between a correlation and a causation... Everyone who drinks water dies... Water makes things wet...

technology in planes is amazing. I wonder what will come out next. good post and story on other page, thanks!

Reminds me of the horridly technological solution they came up with when it was discovered that a vertical landing of the harrier with a side on wind was extremely hazardous. They put a small wind vane on the nose so the pilot could see which way the wind was blowing and then turn into it.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

Mirrors may not be very effective at spotting a contrail at night (preferred operating time for the B-2). The mirror itself may be draggy and perhaps raise the plane's RCS.

Oh I was just being flippant. Couple of bits of wood for a bomb sight when the expensive one would not work and all that.

Re night. We would use a great big flash light.........

It seems those wind vanes on Harriers are connected to a form of yaw stabilization system. With the Harrier's big air intakes so far forward, if the plane starts yawing at low speed, the pilot can lose control rapidly. Barring a very fast ejection, he's likely to die under the circumstances.

From this source:

During the early 1970's a package was developed to help the pilot deal with the issue of sideslip during mid transition where intake momentum drag makes the aircraft directionally unstable. An autostabiliser working through the yaw reaction controls was produced to reduce this instability. Additionally, an indication was provided in the head up display (HUD) of a safe limit of sideforce, allowing the pilot to limit any lateral out of trim that might otherwise result in a loss of lateral control. Finally, in case the pilot was distracted from noticing the HUD warning, rudder pedal shakers were fitted which operated as the HUD sideforce limit was reached. The system shook the pedal that the pilot needed to use to reduce the sideforce, not only reminding him to use his feet, but also indicating which foot.

The F-35B STOVL version of the Joint Strike Fighter made it's first flight yesterday in conventional mode. From this report:

The British Harrier was designed in the 1960s, with constant upgrades possibly extending its life to 2020. Pilots who didn't know the airplane's quirks were in real danger, as opposed to the "fly-by-wire" approach of modern aircraft that keeps pilots out of trouble. "There were golden rules for flying Harriers, like ‘You can't let the sideslip or angle of attack build up, or you'll quickly end up killed,' " he says. "You had that drilled into your forehead during training."

In the case of the F-35, the airplane itself is built to react to pilots' commands and follow the golden rules, allowing pilots to concentrate on tactics and mission-related tasks instead of flying. But when a pilot wants this plane to turn a certain direction or pitch, the aircraft itself figures out the best mechanical way to make it happen.

This translates to less pressure for test pilots and far more for flight engineers. The F-35's engineers have filled the airplane's brain with models of flight situations. During the plane's testing phase the engineers need to make sure that those models match reality. It's a long process: F-35B engine and flight tests will stretch until 2009. Today's flight didn't feature an actual STOVL landing, but instead calculated the airplane's handling in conventional flight. Vertical landing test will begin early next year, Lockheed officials estimate.

Compared to the F-35B, the Harrier is a much simplier airplane. It's also much harder to fly. Sometimes, the simple solution to a complex problem isn't the best way to go.

That is an E-6 (highly modified Boeing 707-320), part of the TACAMO (TAke Charge And Move Out) system of survivable communications links maintained between the National Command Authorities and the triad of strategic nuclear weapon delivery systems (bombers, ICBMs, and SLBMs).

And yes, that is precisely where the fuel dump valves are located.

__________________
I am Mugs, of the Alien clan of Usa, Nordamerica, a Terran, of Sol.

Perception isn't reality. It's merely an abstraction thereof, and quite often not a very good one at that.

I am human. Fully human.

One of my brothers worked on TACAMO his last couple years in the Navy. The plane was new to service at the time and apparently had some problems with part of the tail falling off during flight test. The crews nicknamed the plane the "Gecko".

Do contrails show up on radar? Otherwise, why would you worry about them at night when even the pilot can't see them in a mirror?

__________________
[Foot mouth in put]
Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses.

It'd take a pretty sensitive radar to track a contrail on radar but it is possible. On a clear night, contrails can be easily seen by the naked eye, especially when the moon is bright. The whole point of stealth is to make detection as difficult as possible across the radar spectrum (radars operate on different frequencies), infrared, visible detection, and even acoustically if possible.

For all those who are steadfast in their belief that chemtrails don't exist and who also say there is no evidence of such activity, go to the following site for U.S. Patents on these devices that don't exist.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3899144.html

Although I believe that they do exist, and that their goals are not to endanger the public (directly), the great majority of those we see are normal exhaust contrails. Reading this (and other patents) convinces me of their existance, whether I'm O.K. with the idea or not. Mr Q

__________________
What goes around, comes around, eventually.

Meade DS-10 (10" newt)
10x50, 10x70 binos

A) The existence of a patent for a device doesn't provide actual evidence of its existence, or even that its possible for it to exist.

B)No one has ever denied the existence of numerous systems to release chemicals of various types from aircraft, for example is those used by air display teams to produce coloured exhaust trails.

__________________
Girl: Mister Darwin! The stupid people are breeding and taking over the planet!
Charles Darwin: Tut tut, little girl, don't worry! I'll take care of them with my CHAINSAW OF NATURAL SELECTION! Ahahahahahhaha!!!!!!
-QUeen of Wands 12/08/2003

For all those who are steadfast in their belief that chemtrails don't exist and who also say there is no evidence of such activity, go to the following site for U.S. Patents on these devices that don't exist. (emphasis added)

Straw man. Nobody is trying to say there are no devices for the aerial dispersal of particles or vapors. By "no chemtrails" we mean the claims of wholesale, systematic application of mind-control substances by means of these and similar devices fitted to the commercial and military aviation fleet.

There are many legitimate applications of aerial dispersal of various agents, and the device described in the patent would do very nicely in those applications. This is not proof of the allegations from the chemtrail crowd.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Well, maybe I have been confused about this subject over the years. I always thought "chemtrails" were the dispersion of any chemicals, whether for scientific or military purposes (not skywriting). I have seen reports describing testing of these dispersants that, once drifted to near the ground, could cause health hazards if inhaled. These tests were done after a dispersal for the testing of radio wave propagation by military aircraft. The health hazard was that the size of the particulates were only a few microns in size, thus being able to be transfered directly into the bloodstream if inhaled.
I never intended to include "mind-altering" purposes in my original post. Just whether these "chemtrails do exist or not, which can't be figured out simply by visual observations. Hence the post with the patent.
So my original post question should have been, "Are chemtrails being used for scientific or military purposes?"
From the several post replies for this thread, I see that some people out there just won't acknowledge the idea that chemtrails could be in existance, no mater what the purpose intended for them may be.
I am a firm believer that "aliens" exist - we are not the only "people" in the universe BUT I feel that others visiting us/walking amoung us is happening? Definiitely an extremely low possibility. Keeping an open mind allows us to expand our knowledge of the world(universe) we live in. So I feel it should be with any contraversial subject, such as "chemtrails". Mr Q

__________________
What goes around, comes around, eventually.

Meade DS-10 (10" newt)
10x50, 10x70 binos

Mr. Q,

You're sort of like a man who has walked into the middle an argument between an engineer and somebody who believes radio waves are controling his thoughts and wears a foil hat. Then argueing that radio towers DO exist.

You're not trying to take the side of the loon, but you have missed an important chapter in the plot line.

__________________
"The beauty of that discussion of averages is that you don't have to be an expert in Apollo or in photography in order to see where this time study "analysis" breaks down. You just have to be, well...not an idiot." -JayUtah

Have there been tests done in the past where some things were dispersed? Yes. But this is not what is usually meant by "chemtrails". The general "chemtrail" believer thinks that contrails must disperse after only a few seconds, that they can never last longer despite what over 7 decades of research says. They believe that all long lasting trails are instead part of a military program to change the weather, block the sun, rain chemicals down on us all, etc. They can never agree on the same thing from week to week. Does a massive program in which all long lasting contrails are really some super secret military program to doom us all exist as the "chemtrail" believers think? Most assuredly not. There is no evidence for that at all and that is what this thread is about.

__________________
"Eternal vigilance is the price of supremacy"
------------Mark Twain

"Women are like Voltron. The more you can hook up, the better it gets."

I always thought "chemtrails" were the dispersion of any chemicals, whether for scientific or military purposes (not skywriting). I have seen reports describing testing of these dispersants that, once drifted to near the ground, could cause health hazards if inhaled.

That's not what is meant by the chemtrail conspiracy theory.

I'm sure what you describe occurs or has occurred. The conspiracy theory doesn't cover the legitimate release of dispersand (a dispersant is an agent that causes other materials to disperse; a dispersand is material intended to be dispersed itself) that may misbehave or cause unintended effects.

Instead the conspiracy theory argues that essentially all commercial and military aircraft are fitted with devices that disperse mind-altering chemicals at high altitude, supposedly to make the populace more docile or unquestioning, or buy McDonalds food and gas-guzzling SUVs. The point is that the only evidence they offer is the observation of persistent trails behind those aircraft and the interpretation that if they were vapor trails from the engines, aerodynamic effects, etc. then they would rapidly disperse naturally and be invisible.

So you have to come to an understanding of "chemtrail" as the conspiracy theorists use it to understand the context for our objection. Yes -- as I said there are many legitimate practices that involve dispersing material in the air. No one here argues that doesn't occur.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base